JN0-636 Exam Dumps - Security, Professional (JNCIP-SEC)

The exhibit shows the output of the show security mka sessions summary command on an SRX Series device. This command displays the status of the MACsec Key Agreement (MKA) sessions on the device. In the output, we can see that there are two CAKs configured for the interface ge-0/0/1 - FFFF and EEEE. The CAK named FFFF has the type preceding and the status live. The CAK named EEEE has the type fallback and the status active.

The two statements that are true about the CAK status for the CAK named FFFF are:

• CAK is not used for encryption and decryption of the MACsec session. This is because the CAK is only used for authentication and key exchange between the MACsec peers. The CAK is not used for encrypting or decrypting the MACsec traffic. The encryption and decryption of the MACsec session is done by the Secure Association Key (SAK), which is derived from the CAK using the MKA protocol.
• SAK is not generated using this key. This is because the CAK named FFFF has the type preceding, which means that it is a legacy key that is used for backward compatibility with older MACsec devices. The preceding key is not used for generating the SAK, but only for authenticating the MACsec peers. The SAK is generated using the active key, which is the CAK named EEEE in this case.

References: Juniper Security, Professional (JNCIP-SEC) Reference Materials source and documents: https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/reference/command-summary/show-security-mka-sessions-summary.html https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/concept/security-macsec-overview.html

In IPsec CoS-based VPNs, the number of IPsec Security Associations (SAs) associated with a peer is based on the number of forwarding classes configured for the VPN. The forwarding classes are used to classify and prioritize different types of traffic, such as voice and data traffic. Each forwarding class requires a separate IPsec SA to be established between the peers, in order to provide the appropriate level of security and quality of service for each type of traffic.

To find an infected host and where the attack came from using the Juniper ATP Cloud, you need to use the Hosts and Threat Sources monitor workspaces. The other options are incorrect because:

• B. The File Scanning monitor workspace shows the files that have been scanned by the Juniper ATP Cloud and their verdicts (clean, malicious, or unknown). It does not show the infected hosts or the attack sources1.
• D. The Encrypted Traffic monitor workspace shows the encrypted traffic that has been decrypted by the Juniper ATP Cloud and the certificates that have been used. It does not show the infected hosts or the attack sources2.

Therefore, the correct answer is A and C. You need to use the Hosts and Threat Sources monitor workspaces to find an infected host and where the attack came from using the Juniper ATP Cloud. To do so, you need to perform the following steps:

• For Hosts, you need to access the Hosts monitor workspace in the Juniper ATP Cloud WebUI by selecting Monitor > Hosts. You can see the list of hosts that have been detected by the Juniper ATP Cloud and their risk scores, infection levels, and threat categories. You can filter the hosts by various criteria, such as IP address, hostname, domain, or threat category. You can also drill down into each host to see the details of the files, applications, and incidents associated with the host. You can identify the infected host by looking for the host with the highest risk score, infection level, or threat category3.
• For Threat Sources, you need to access the Threat Sources monitor workspace in the Juniper ATP Cloud WebUI by selecting Monitor > Threat Sources. You can see the list of threat sources that have been detected by the Juniper ATP Cloud and their risk scores, threat categories, and geolocations. You can filter the threat sources by various criteria, such as IP address, domain, or threat category. You can also drill down into each threat source to see the details of the files, applications, and incidents associated with the threat source. You can identify the attack source by looking for the threat source with the highest risk score, threat category, or geolocation that matches the infected host.

References:

• File Scanning
• Encrypted Traffic
• Hosts
• [Threat Sources]

According to the output of the traceoptions file called radius, the source of the problem is that the RADIUS server IP address is unreachable. This is indicated by the line FAILURE: sendto: No route to host, which shows that the SRX device cannot send the authentication request to the RADIUS server. This could be due to a network issue, such as a misconfigured route, a firewall blocking the traffic, or a physical link failure.

To troubleshoot this issue, the user should check the following:

• The RADIUS server IP address and port are correctly configured on the SRX device. The user can verify this by using the command show configuration access radius-server1.
• The SRX device can ping the RADIUS server IP address. The user can use the command ping  to test the connectivity2.
• The SRX device has a valid route to the RADIUS server IP address. The user can use the command show route  to check the routing table3.
• The SRX device and the RADIUS server are using the same shared secret key. The user can verify this by using the command show configuration access radius-server secret1.
• The SRX device and the RADIUS server are using the same authentication protocol. The user can verify this by using the command show configuration access profile 4.
• The firewall policies on the SRX device and any intermediate devices are allowing the RADIUS traffic. The user can use the command show security policies from-zone to-zone  to check the firewall policies5.

References: 1: Configuring RADIUS Server Parameters 2: ping - Technical Documentation - Support - Juniper Networks 3: show route - Technical Documentation - Support - Juniper Networks 4: Configuring Authentication Profiles 5: show security policies - Technical Documentation - Support - Juniper Networks

The exhibit shows the configuration of filter-based forwarding on an SRX Series device. Filter-based forwarding is a feature that allows the device to use firewall filters to direct traffic to different routing instances based on the match criteria. In this scenario, the device has two routing instances - ISP-1 and ISP-2 - and two firewall filters - FBF and FBF-ISP-1. The FBF filter is applied to the ge-0/0/1 interface as an input filter. The FBF filter has one term that matches the traffic from the 172.25.0.0/24 network and directs it to the ISP-1 routing instance. The ISP-1 routing instance has a static route to the next hop 172.20.0.2. The FBF-ISP-1 filter is applied to the ge-0/0/0 interface as an output filter. The FBF-ISP-1 filter has one term that matches the traffic to the 172.20.0.2 next hop and sets the forwarding class to expedited-forwarding.

The problem in this scenario is that the traffic from the other network (172.25.1.0/24) is not being forwarded to the upstream 172.21.0.2 neighbor. This is because the FBF filter does not have a term that accepts the traffic from the 172.25.1.0/24 network. The FBF filter only has one term that matches the traffic from the 172.25.0.0/24 network and directs it to the ISP-1 routing instance. The traffic from the 172.25.1.0/24 network does not match this term and is therefore discarded by the implicit deny action at the end of the filter. The traffic from the 172.25.1.0/24 network should be forwarded to the ISP-2 routing instance, which has a static default route to the next hop 172.21.0.2.

To solve this problem, you must add another term to the FBF filter to accept the traffic from the 172.25.1.0/24 network. This term should have the action accept, which means that the traffic will be forwarded according to the routing table of the master routing instance. The master routing instance has a static default route to the ISP-2 routing instance, which in turn has a static default route to the next hop 172.21.0.2. By adding this term, the traffic from the 172.25.1.0/24 network will be forwarded to the upstream 172.21.0.2 neighbor as expected.

The configuration of the new term in the FBF filter could look something like this:

[edit firewall family inet filter FBF] term 2 { from { source-address { 172.25.1.0/24; } } then { accept; } }

References: Juniper Security, Professional (JNCIP-SEC) Reference Materials source and documents: https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/concept/firewall-filter-option-filter-based-forwarding-overview.html https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/example/filter-based-forwarding-example.html

According to the output of the command show configuration services security-intelligence url, the SRX Series device is directly enrolled with Juniper ATP Cloud. This is indicated by the URL https://cloudfeeds.argon.junipersecurity.net/api/manifest.xml , which is the default URL for Juniper ATP Cloud1. This means that the device is not enrolled with Policy Enforcer, which would use a different URL that includes the IP address of the Policy Enforcer server2. Therefore, the problem in this scenario is that the device is directly enrolled with Juniper ATP Cloud, which prevents it from being enrolled with Policy Enforcer.

To enroll the device with Policy Enforcer, the user needs to disenroll the device from Juniper ATP Cloud first. This can be done by using the following command:

delete services security-intelligence url

This command will remove the Juniper ATP Cloud URL from the device configuration and stop the device from receiving threat feeds from Juniper ATP Cloud1. After that, the user can enroll the device with Policy Enforcer by using the Security Director GUI or the SLAX script2.

References: 1: Configuring Juniper ATP Cloud on SRX Series Devices 2: Enrolling SRX Series Devices with Policy Enforcer

According to the security flow trace shown in the exhibit, which is a snippet of a packet capture on an SRX Series device, the two statements that are correct are:

• This packet arrived on interface ge-0/0/4.0. This is indicated by the line In: 10.0.1.129/22 -> 10.0.1.129/3382;1,0x0, which shows that the ingress interface of the packet is ge-0/0/4.0, as the interface name is prefixed to the source and destination IP addresses and ports of the packet1.
• An existing session is found in the table. This is indicated by the line Found: session id 0x12. sess tok 28685, which shows that the packet matches an existing session in the session table with the session ID 0x12 and the session token 286852.

The following statements are incorrect or not supported by the output:

• Destination NAT occurs. This is not supported by the output, as there is no indication of destination NAT being applied to the packet. The destination IP address of the packet is 10.0.1.129, which is the same as the destination IP address of the original packet. If destination NAT was applied, the destination IP address of the packet would be different from the destination IP address of the original packet.
• The capture is a packet from the source address 172.20.101.10 destined to 10.0.1.129. This is false, as the output shows that the source address of the packet is 10.0.1.129, not 172.20.101.10. The source IP address of the packet is prefixed to the ingress interface name ge-0/0/4.0.

References: 1: Understanding Security Flow Trace 2: show security flow session - Technical Documentation - Support - Juniper Networks